Iran demands UK admit soliders in their water for release

APE · Post by **APE** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:53 pm

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,262123,00.html

"First they have to admit that they have made a mistake. Admitting the mistake will facilitate a solution to the problem," Mottaki said in Riyadh, where he was a guest at a summit of Arab leaders. "But unfortunately the British have not admitted their mistake."

Admit it, get your men back and then flaunt the fact Iran was totally wrong.

not just souLLy now · Post by **not just souLLy now** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:04 am

Fox News=Null?

SuperMegatron · Post by **SuperMegatron** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:22 am

APE wrote:
Admit it, get your men back and then flaunt the fact Iran was totally wrong.

Why? Remember the great press the British got when the went to war with Argentina over some little ice cover island. Time magazine had a picture of a british battle ship and in big letters "The Empire Strikes Back!!". The world saw the british as a major power again. If they back off now then they need to hang up their gloves and stop trying to play with the big kids.

Hawq · Post by **Hawq** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:16 pm

SuperMegatron wrote:
APE wrote:
Admit it, get your men back and then flaunt the fact Iran was totally wrong.
Why? Remember the great press the British got when the went to war with Argentina over some little ice cover island. Time magazine had a picture of a british battle ship and in big letters "The Empire Strikes Back!!". The world saw the british as a major power again. If they back off now then they need to hang up their gloves and stop trying to play with the big kids.

But if we do that what will America do next time they want to go to war?

back on topic they Iranians have already coerced the woman into admitting thwey were in Iranian waters despite gps evidence proving they werent, suspicious that the woman was the first one they got to 'confess' eh? they must be using 'gentle tactics' to prod them into it "akmed get the nipple clamps & car battery!"

Komid · Post by **Komid** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:52 pm

All reports I have heard say that the patrol boats were within Iraqi waters. Now I can understand if the Iranians miscalculated their border, mistakenly enforced it, and returned the troops unharmed. Apologies would be accepted.

However that is not the situation. Irans actions constitute an act of war. And you can rest assured that if they do not comply with our demands that military action will be taken in one form or another.

SuperMegatron · Post by **SuperMegatron** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:36 pm

The only good thing to come of this is the excuse to blow up Irans nuclear facility.

butters · Post by **butters** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:58 pm

So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?

SuperMegatron · Post by **SuperMegatron** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:15 pm

butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?

Yes and coming soon America in Venezuela and Cuba look for it in 2008.

pavelbure · Post by **pavelbure** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:08 pm

SuperMegatron wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
Yes and coming soon America in Venezuela and Cuba look for it in 2008.

not in cuba. nothing in that rat hole of a socialist or communist or whatever the heck it is country.

again... rat hole.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:12 pm

Lartrak · Post by **Lartrak** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:46 pm

pavelbure wrote:
SuperMegatron wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
Yes and coming soon America in Venezuela and Cuba look for it in 2008.
not in cuba. nothing in that rat hole of a socialist or communist or whatever the heck it is country.

again... rat hole.

It's a beautiful country, regardless of the decay over the past 47 years.

Covar · Post by **Covar** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:13 pm

butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?

we've been set up for it ever since 2002. we currently have iran completely surrounded. if we needed to go in there we would make quick work of it.

Post by **|darc|** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:15 pm

Covar wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
we've been set up for it ever since 2002. we currently have iran completely surrounded. if we needed to go in there we would make quick work of it.

Yep, just like Iraq.

Zealous zerotype · Post by **Zealous zerotype** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:15 pm

Covar wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
we've been set up for it ever since 2002. we currently have iran completely surrounded. if we needed to go in there we would make quick work of it.

I believe that.

bull fucking shit I do.

SuperMegatron · Post by **SuperMegatron** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:41 pm

|darc| wrote: Yep, just like Iraq.

Look at the Shia areas of Iraq they are fine for the most part minus the ones that border the Sunni. In Iran they are virtually all Shia so using Iraq as a model there shouldnt be any in fighting.Thats the main problem in Iraq. The kurds there might take the advantage of it and join the Iraqi and turkey kurds and form a new state but thats Turkey's problem not ours.

Zealous zerotype · Post by **Zealous zerotype** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:48 pm

SuperMegatron wrote:
|darc| wrote: Yep, just like Iraq.
Turkey's problem not ours.

This whole thing didn't need to be our problem.

neoak · Post by **neoak** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:40 pm

SuperMegatron wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
Yes and coming soon America in Venezuela and Cuba look for it in 2008.

A continent invading a country?

Post by **|darc|** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:51 pm

neoak wrote:
SuperMegatron wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
Yes and coming soon America in Venezuela and Cuba look for it in 2008.
A continent invading a country?

America is more than a continent.

Post by **Roofus** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:58 pm

|darc| wrote:
neoak wrote:
SuperMegatron wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
Yes and coming soon America in Venezuela and Cuba look for it in 2008.
A continent invading a country?
America is more than a continent.

It's two continents, plus a land bridge connecting them,

FiendWithoutAface · Post by **FiendWithoutAface** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:09 pm

|darc| wrote:
Covar wrote:
butters wrote:So does this mean the U.S. will end up with troops in yet another country?
we've been set up for it ever since 2002. we currently have iran completely surrounded. if we needed to go in there we would make quick work of it.
Yep, just like Iraq.

The invasion of Iraq was a sweeping success. It's the fact that we stayed and are trying to rebuild the country that everything has gone sour.

Iran demands UK admit soliders in their water for release

Iran demands UK admit soliders in their water for release

Re: Iran demands UK admit soliders in their water for release

Re: Iran demands UK admit soliders in their water for release